Literature DB >> 27837021

The double identity of linguistic doubling.

Iris Berent1, Outi Bat-El2, Diane Brentari3, Amanda Dupuis4, Vered Vaknin-Nusbaum5,6.   

Abstract

Does knowledge of language consist of abstract principles, or is it fully embodied in the sensorimotor system? To address this question, we investigate the double identity of doubling (e.g., slaflaf, or generally, XX; where X stands for a phonological constituent). Across languages, doubling is known to elicit conflicting preferences at different levels of linguistic analysis (phonology vs. morphology). Here, we show that these preferences are active in the brains of individual speakers, and they are demonstrably distinct from sensorimotor pressures. We first demonstrate that doubling in novel English words elicits divergent percepts: Viewed as meaningless (phonological) forms, doubling is disliked (e.g., slaflaf < slafmak), but once doubling in form is systematically linked to meaning (e.g., slaf = ball, slaflaf = balls), the doubling aversion shifts into a reliable (morphological) preference. We next show that sign-naive speakers spontaneously project these principles to novel signs in American Sign Language, and their capacity to do so depends on the structure of their spoken language (English vs. Hebrew). These results demonstrate that linguistic preferences doubly dissociate from sensorimotor demands: A single stimulus can elicit diverse percepts, yet these percepts are invariant across stimulus modality--for speech and signs. These conclusions are in line with the possibility that some linguistic principles are abstract, and they apply broadly across language modality.

Keywords:  embodiment; language universals; morphology; phonology; sign language

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27837021      PMCID: PMC5137774          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1613749113

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  4 in total

Review 1.  Active perception: sensorimotor circuits as a cortical basis for language.

Authors:  Friedemann Pulvermüller; Luciano Fadiga
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 34.870

2.  The phonological mind.

Authors:  Iris Berent
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 20.229

3.  Productive reduplication in a fundamentally monosyllabic language.

Authors:  Ronnie B Wilbur
Journal:  Lang Sci       Date:  2009

4.  Phonological reduplication in sign language: Rules rule.

Authors:  Iris Berent; Amanda Dupuis; Diane Brentari
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-06-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.